I'm pretty sure the first batch of B777s they got was with GE90s. But,
apparently they had some problem with them (hopefully someone in this
forum will be able to give us more details on this) and they were not
totally happy with them. So, the second batch of B777s they ordered was
with RRs.

Firstly, for the original order (the 5 A market frames and remainder IGW), BA went with GE. Why? Many suggest it was because GE made BA an offer they couldn't refuse...to take over the Cardiff Maintenance facility for engine overhaul.

For the second order (the Y-MM* regns), it's either because

1) BA weren't particularly happy with the GE engines in the early days....reliability problems, fan blades, extra inspections etc.
2) BA dumped a 747 order in favour of more 777s, the engines for the 747s had been ordered from RR, and there would have been massive change penalties had the RB211 order not been changed to Trents for the 777s.

...this topic's only been covered ten thousand and one times, but anywho:

BA was the launch customer for the GE90, and it had teething problems.

That and even though it was built with a heavily-fortified core (which was its biggest weakness in the A-market, but later became its biggest advantage for the newest 777s); GE was initially reluctant to take it beyond 90,000lbs thrust of output in the B-market.

Combine this with an outstanding debt to RR due to a defunct RB211 order, and an overall cost assessment showing that RR would be the expedient path....

...BA decided to order the Trent895 for its remaining 777s.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Somewhat ironically, if/when BA goes for the 777NGs, they'll once again be ordering GE90 powered aircraft.... which contrary to the ridiculous albeit strongly-held belief of some members here, would be of negligible difficulty/cost to the airline.

When considering this, it should be noted that the PW engine as well as GE and RR were also evaluated in 1998, RR won, so the notion that a more powerful engine was needed was correct, it is also true that GE90 did have teething problems.
Honestly, I don't know where this idea that BA had to buy RR because of cancelled 747 orders has come from.

For the past 3 1/2 years that I've seen this notion that BA HAD to buy R/R in 1998 on here (and nowhere else), I have made a point of asking everyone I know who may shed light on this within BA, no-one has ever recognized this to be true.
I also remember our R/R rep (for Olympus engines) being surprised that R/R was chosen in 1998, pleased of course with comments like 'should have brought R/R in the first place', which is the view of everyone too.
For no other reason that selling the engine overhaul to GE has been a disaster, just this year we've had problems with them having contamination issues causing a bunch of RB211's to be parked causing some of BA's problems this summer.

I'm with you, GDB, a good friend of mine was a BA employee at the time of the GE/RR switch, and he's never heard of this "must buy Trents in place of RB211's" story. According to him it was all down to reliability issues with the GE90. Funny how all the BA employees tell that scenario, where as ConcordeBoy, who has nothing to do with BA i might add, comes out with the other.

which contrary to the ridiculous albeit strongly-held belief of some members here, would be of negligible difficulty/cost to the airline.

Of course it would be negligable. They already have a sizable GE90 powered 777 fleet. It wouldn't make any difference to them.

BA chose the GE90 originally because of the maintenance base issue. It may surprise alot of you particuarly Concordeboy, but it really was as simple as that. The savings on that facility were huge and BA could not resist that. It has nothing whatsoever to do with RB211's!
The RR engine was chosen on merit and merit alone. We are not discussing the 200LR or the 300ER 777's with GE that BA might choose someday this is about the original GE90's. The original GE90 aircraft had appauling, yes thats right appauling reliability compared to the P&W and RR offerings. There were numerous occasions where blades broke off (one which I witnessed) being brought into the hangar for the 5th time G-ZZZB! The RR engines on the other hand offered superb reliability and still do compared to their older GE90 counterparts!
I have to say i am amazed at how many people are still blind to the obvious failings of the GE90, that was all it was nothing else! When we at BA were flying B777's across to Paris that tells you there was a HUGE problem with the engine. BA can honestly brag that they had 12 minute ETOPS crossing the english channel because the GE90 could not get certified for trans-atlantic crossings. More proof of this was the fact the BA 777's were deployed to southern europe and the middle east (again with a lot of dwon time)

Concordeboy, i have nothing against you or this forum, but please get your information correct before attacking others.

For the past 3 1/2 years that I've seen this notion that BA HAD to buy R/R in 1998 on here (and nowhere else)

But I haven't
Check your email.

It may surprise alot of you particuarly Concordeboy, but it really was as simple as that

...not sure from whence you derive this drivel, but if you'd conduct a simple (yeah, it really is as simple as that ) search-run on the myriad times this topic has arisen-- you'd see that I've stated your aforementioned quote more often than any other.

Of course it would be negligable. They already have a sizable GE90 powered 777 fleet. It wouldn't make any difference to them.

...'bout time you learned that; considering that you argued the complete opposite through two whole threads

It has nothing whatsoever to do with RB211's!

...I'm curious, whom here claimed that it did?

There were numerous occasions where blades broke off (one which I witnessed) being brought into the hangar for the 5th time G-ZZZB!

I've gotten to see several maintenance reports from BA where within a GE90's blades separated from their holding wells, I'll give you that...

...but I defy that you could provide any corroboration WHATSOEVER that a GE90s fan blade "broke off".

I have to say i am amazed at how many people are still blind to the obvious failings of the GE90

...thus proving to anyone reading this, that your posting is little more than a beveled rant

When we at BA were flying B777's across to Paris that tells you there was a HUGE problem with the engine

What sort of tripe is that statement?

...nearly ALL airlines operate a new type (particularly if they're among the earliest customers) regionally before operating them on their intended mission profile.

BA can honestly brag that they had 12 minute ETOPS crossing the english channel because the GE90 could not get certified for trans-atlantic crossings.

The engine/airframe received ETOPS certification (at BA) sufficient for transatlantic crossings not long after its delivery, and then received ETOPS180 certification by both the FAA/JAA in October 1996-- the same month as did its competitor

Utter rubbish! There is no way you could have seen them, if you did then I would say there is a serious security breach at either Heathrow or Cardiff! That is not something an anybody like you can get their hands on, it is sensitive due to manufacturers and company policies to prevent media hysteria etc.

'nearly ALL airlines operate a new type (particularly if they're among the earliest customers) regionally before operating them on their intended mission profile.'

Again you have no idea, they trial aircraft like that on Shannon and other routes not commercially PARIS!. It was not certified for months to cross the atlantic and as already mentioned they were put on the middle eastern routes to until certification was achieved 11 months later when LHR-BOS was flown. You are really clutching at straws, I was there, you weren't, I worked there, you didn't. Go on and call because I am getting fed up with you thinking you know everything when you obviously don't.

This is not an AirbusvBoeing battle or an RRvGE battle this is about you filling this thread with your own stories which are not true. Call BA, Call GE lets see what they have to say because I can assure you my colleagues are awaiting your call.

I've never once claimed that RB211s have anything to do with BA acquiring GE90s.

Very clever, ConcordeBoy, twisting peoples words in your own favour. Shows the kind of low life you are. If i were you i'd leave this thread until you've done as RRFan suggested and actually call BA, and speak to someone who actually has seen the maintenance reports, rather than dreamed them.

I noticed that you live in New Orleans, if at all I am in the area and it isn't very often due to BA not flying there, I would like to further discuss this subject to better our mutual interests in this area.